from the could-have-saved-some-of-that... dept

Nearly five years ago, we predicted that Qualcomm was wasting a ton of money with its MediaFlo effort. The company had bought up a bunch of spectrum to create a special broadcast TV offering for mobile phones. It didn't take a genius to predict why that wouldn't make much sense. First of all, using spectrum for straight broadcast video ignores that content is increasingly multi-directional, interactive and on-demand. In an age where more and more people were using their DVRs to time shift, their iPods to place shift and mobile phones to communicate on the go, the idea of watching broadcast television on your mobile phone just seemed to be a solution stuck in a prediction from decades ago, rather than one that actually looked at what the technology allowed.

I have to admit that after writing a few negative pieces on MediaFlo, I did get a nasty email from someone at Qualcomm, who insisted that I didn't know what I was talking about, and the demand for such a broadcast TV system, just for mobile devices, was "off the charts." Apparently, it was off the charts in the wrong direction. After spending so much money, Qualcomm recently announced that it's shutting down the effort (which is now called Flo TV). Next time, Qualcomm, if you're looking to throw away hundreds of millions of dollars, you can just give it to me, and I'll save you the trouble...

from the wonders-never-cease dept

Qualcomm and Nokia have been involved in a long-running series of patent disputes over chips in mobile phones. The two companies settled the bulk of their disputes last summer, with Nokia throwing a chunk of change at Qualcomm and the two making nice. This week, the two companies announced they'd work together to put Qualcomm chips in Nokia devices. Nokia, the top global handset vendor, has never used Qualcomm chips, and the work will first be focused on devices for the US market, where Nokia's market share lags far behind its share in the rest of the world. So Qualcomm gets a big new chip customer, Nokia strengthens its offerings for the US markets, and consumers benefit from increased competition. Sounds good all around, and makes you wonder why the companies resisted such an approach in favor of the patent fight for so long.

from the its-that-time-again dept

Each of the last, oh, 4 or 5 years has been heralded as "the year of mobile TV," despite plenty of questions over the real demand for a paid recreation of old-school broadcast television, a medium that's falling out of favor as people look to DVRs and on-demand services. It's already looking like 2009 won't be any different, as Qualcomm is talking up the expansion plans for its MediaFLO network, saying it will be available in an additional 46 markets by the end of next year. The implication is that by having 108 active markets instead of 62, it's primed to take off. But if the people in those 46 extra markets have roughly the same demand for the service as those in the existing markets, it's hard to see a huge bump in growth. Indeed, as the original story notes, "MediaFLO hasn't taken off as quickly as [Qualcomm] had hoped, and it's unclear how many users the service has through its partnerships with Verizon Wireless and AT&T.

It adds, however, that among its user base, live events like the US Open golf tournament cause big spike in viewer numbers (again, though, that's viewers -- not subscribers). This is one area where mobile TV could hold some promise, as live events like sports or breaking news still call for a traditional broadcast model. But the subscription-based model remains a big barrier, particularly as consumers look to reign in their spending. There are lots of mobile services billed as being "just $5 or $10 a month," but given tighter household purse strings, that "just $5" is going to hold back the growth of many of them.

from the interesting-ideas dept

Over the years, there have been many different attempts to bring back the old school terminal-mainframe computing paradigm with various internet terminals, but for the most part, they've failed to catch on. More recently, with the growth of various internet application suites, the concept is starting to seem a bit more viable, and the rise of super cheap "netbooks" have taken advantage of that. Qualcomm is apparently looking to take this a step further, with an attempt to basically turn any screen into an internet terminal using 3G connections in developing countries.

Qualcomm, obviously, makes money wherever there's more mobile data usage, so it has every incentive to create new ways to get more people online. The article is a bit short on details, but it sounds like Qualcomm will be offering up a small device that can easily connect to certain televisions or computer monitors, and connect them to the internet. The idea is that someone with one of these devices can turn an existing screen into an internet terminal, without having to go purchase a computer or netbook or whatever. As an idea, it's intriguing, but as with all of these things, it's the execution that really matters. And, my guess is that the folks who already have screens that would work with such a device, are more likely to already have other means of internet access already.

from the it's-something dept

Qualcomm has always been a strong supporter of the patent system, as it was the basis for much of its revenue over the past decade. However, lately, the company has been getting hit left and right by patent lawsuits against it. Last week, though, the company ended up with a few minor (and perhaps temporary) victories against opponents. First, the International Trade Commission tossed out a complaint from Nokia asking the ITC to ban the import of Qualcomm chips. Nokia had simply taken a page from Broadcom, who had successfully used the ITC loophole to get a second shot at Qualcomm over its patents. Given how often companies have been starting to use this loophole, it's nice to see that the ITC doesn't always rollover for patent holders.

In the meantime, speaking of Broadcom, we had noted last month that thanks to a Supreme Court ruling that raised the bar for declaring "willful" infringement of a patent, the judge in the Qualcomm-Broadcom suit had given Broadcom a choice. Either retry the case under the new rules, or drop the "willful" part and get less money from Qualcomm. Broadcom has now chosen the latter option, and will accept a smaller payout from Qualcomm for infringement. Of course, it's not all good news for Qualcomm. Nokia still has lawsuits going against Qualcomm, with one getting underway in the UK this week. Broadcom is still seeking the courts to rule for an injunction blocking the import of certain Qualcomm chips as well (even as the ITC is already helping out on that front). Once again, no one seems willing to explain why Broadcom gets to take two whacks at Qualcomm over the same exact issue. In the meantime, while it would be nice to think that these recent messy lawsuits would give Qualcomm a chance to rethink some of its beliefs about the patent system, somehow that seems unlikely to happen any time soon.

from the willful-just-doesn't-mean-what-it-used-to dept

Qualcomm's run into plenty of trouble in its ongoing patent battles with Broadcom, but the company finally received some minor good news. Back in August, we had noted that the appeals court that deals with patent issues had changed the standard under which patent infringement is considered "willful" (and, thus, subject to triple damages). Before this, the standard had been fairly low, causing all sorts of silly things like firms forbiding employees from looking at patents for fear that this makes the liable for willful infringement. However, the new higher standard is already making waves through the court system. For example, Qualcomm had already lost the court battle over patent infringement on some Broadcom patents -- and the ruling had said that Qualcomm was guilty of willful infringement, leading the judge to double the fine from the $19.6 million the jury suggested to $39.3 million. With the new standards in place, however, it's not clear if Qualcomm really is guilty of willful infringement and the judge is offering Broadcom a choice on how to proceed. Either it can drop the claim that the infringement was willful -- or it can drop the original decision and start again. If Broadcom drops the willful part, then the ruling will stand, but the fine will be reduced. If Broadcom wants to push for the higher damages of willful infringement, it'll need to redo the entire trial and make sure the infringement lives up to the new willful standards.

from the loopholes-are-fun dept

A few months ago, we pointed out that since the Supreme Court made it clear that patent injunctions were being used too often, many companies were starting to use a loophole. Rather than just going through the courts to get an injunction, they would go to the US International Trade Commission and ask it for an injunction against those they accused of patent infringement. While courts need to follow the lead of the Supreme Court, the ITC could make whatever decision it wanted on whether or not a particular product actually did infringe and whether or not an injunction should be granted. It gives patent holders a second shot, outside of the court system, to get an injunction. In fact, right after we discussed this, Broadcom used exactly that loophole to get an injunction against certain Qualcomm chips. Qualcomm has been fighting this injunction without much luck, and it seems to have encouraged others to try the same thing. Nokia and Qualcomm have been engaged in a rather vicious patent fight recently -- and suddenly Nokia has come up with a strategy of (you guessed it) asking the ITC to ban the import of Qualcomm chips for patent infringement. Wonder where that idea came from? The folks at the ITC might want to start staffing up in the division that has to review these patent injunction requests. It sounds like there's going to be plenty to do in the near future.

from the that's-gotta-hurt dept

This has not been a good week for Qualcomm on the patent front. The company, which relies heavily on the patent system for its business model, is discovering that putting so much faith in patents can be a two-edged sword. It's already been covered that the President Bush refused to intervene in the International Trade Commission's decision to bar the import of next generation Qualcomm chips. However, as with many patent infringement fights, this battle is taking place on many fronts at once, with both sides suing each other over various patent infringement claims (the so-called nuclear war that is bound to break out when companies view patents as nuclear stockpiling). In one of the cases where Qualcomm charged Broadcom with infringement (rather than the other way around), a judge hasn't just sided with Broadcom, but has stated that Qualcomm waived its right to enforce the patents in question by withholding info on the patents from a standards body. This type of behavior is becoming all too common when patents and standards bodies mix -- and it's causing all sorts of problems in delaying, fracturing and generally killing technology standards that would be helpful in driving the market forward. For its part, Qualcomm claims it played by the rules, though, that's not saying it actually disclosed everything. Either way, it's yet another reminder that patents are very much a two-edged sword, and those who bet entire business models on patents need to recognize how it can backfire.

from the leave-me-out-of-this dept

Back in June, Broadcom used a bit of a loophole to get Qualcomm in trouble over patents. Rather than just going the traditional court route, Broadcom had the International Trade Commission simply decide that Qualcomm infringed on Broadcom patents, and bar the import of certain next generation Qualcomm chips. While Qualcomm will still appeal the decision in court, it also appealed directly to President Bush. It would appear the President has more important things to do with his time than get involved in a pointless patent battle, as he's decided to allow the ban to stand. Once again, expect many more companies to start going to the International Trade Commission as a way of getting around court rulings that have been a lot less kind to bogus patents lately. In the meantime, Qualcomm claims it has a workaround to avoid infringing on the patent, but somehow we expect Broadcom won't be satisfied.